1. Never calls to tell me this. They put a note in their system which I cannot read. From the patron side, it just looks like they haven’t checked it in yet, so I keep getting fined day after day until I call and ask or come in and they let me know.

2. When I do finally realize the problem and bring in the dvd, they still do not check it in until they find the case again. This can take weeks. I get charged an overdue fine EVERY SINGLE DAY.

3. When I discuss this issue with staff, they say only one person can help me and he works 9-5 (funny, like *I* do). When I email him, there is no response. The last time this happened I had to write the director of the library to get any sort of response.

4. As a result, I will never volunteer for them or give them any dough.

My Uni wouldn’t release your transcript unless you paid your fines. So no grad school unless you pay fines!

I work in a library that doesn’t charge fines, but which is very hot on collecting money for lost or v. overdue books. The fines would be pretty impossible to administer as most of our users (see ? a middle way between ‘customers’ and ‘patrons’) post books back to us anyway, so they would be penalised for not living in the same city as the library.

I always wondered how far universities took the ‘witholding your degree’ thing. Am very glad I stopped working in my uni’s library when I graduated, so I didn’t have to put up with angry students !

As regards terminology I loathe the term ‘customer’ which implies a commercial relationship – all core services (at the very least) should be free and as far as I am concerned public libraries serve citizens NOT consumers. Surely patron, reader, member or borrower are all preferable to ‘customer’.

I don’t like the idea of upfront fees for checking items out. Support for all library services should come from the community at large–whether via tuition/fees applied to all students or taxes applied to all taxpaying citizens. Note that the poor student on scholarship or lessened tuition or the untaxed homeless person is given the “break” needed at the start. Neither user is incapable of meeting the borrower agreement, since no fees apply unless the item is turned in late–which is a choice. One could argue that those with mental disabilities may in fact be incapable of meeting the borrower’s agreement. Has any library addressed that?

Overall though, it’s simple. People who are perpetually late/flighty about dates may suffer. (These same people tend to pay penalties when the mortgage/credit card bill/electric bill/etc. don’t get paid on time. Too bad. Flightiness has its price.)

What’s the harm in asking library card holders to agree to the terms of being a borrower and then applying a fine when they neglect to meet the terms of the agreement? How does this make the library unfair, mean, unpleasant? It doesn’t. (I’m sure those who feel otherwise also find the bank/electric company/meter maid, etc. unpleasant and mean. Which is ridiculous and shows a childishness which seems to be growing in the American population.)

Some libraries offer “grace periods” but this should be written into the borrowers’ agreement (just like Blockbuster did for a while).

Regarding libraries going the way of Netflix. Love the idea–but it means you can only get 10 books at a time (or however many), and no more until those are brought back. Most libraries though want increased circulation and limits are not in vogue. I LOVE the idea of limits though. I think it is a good way to share limited resources.

When I asked the reason for this, I was told that the current mayor (who comes from a big business background) saw the library fines as being a revenue stream and that when we forgave fines, we were essentially stealing from the city.

So the clerks on the front line get yelled at and abused and have no real recourse but the smile and apologize. Normally, the patron will pay the fine (often times in the most insulting manner possible) and move on with their life. However the vocal minority who do not pay go all the way through the city government until someone in the mayor’s office says “Well, that doesn’t seem reasonable.” and the fine is forgiven.

More often than not, those same people who were told there job depends on following policy are formally reprimanded for not “being for flexible”.

Essentially, the fine system has been turned into a political tool and the lowest rung of the hierarchy pays the price.

2. Technology is started to offer a better option. My public library has optional email notices for overdues, holds, ILLs, etc. Not too long ago, they set it up so that instead of getting your first overdue message after you’re already racking up fines, you get a friendly email one day before your books are due reminding you to renew or return them. It’s all automatically generated through the ILS. I don’t know if it’s improved return rates with other library patrons, but it’s sure improved mine.

I do think we need some alternatives to fines (or “extended loan fees”–talk about Orwellian!). At my previous job, where the fines were quite steep, there were some kids who had about $95 in fines, mostly built up around the time their mother died. Because of the fines, they weren’t allowed to check out books. Staff members would then complain that they spent all this time in the library but never got books out. I kept arguing that even if the library wouldn’t give them amnesty, we should at least let them work the fines off, because I very much doubted that they or their family had the money to pay them.

I don’t want to be in the business of keeping kids away from books. If library fines are acting as a barrier–and I think they are–then they need to go. And Angel, it’s not that I’m out to absolve people of personal responsibility–I just think there are other, and better, ways of demonstrating it.

As for the Blockbuster analogy, am I the only one who remembers the class action lawsuit when people found out the hard way that while there were no fines they had “bought” the movie after 30 days? If you think haggling over $10 in fines is fun wait until people start coming in when the library has emptied their bank account or maxed out their credit card because they “forgot” to bring back 20 children’s books for a few months.

Also, implementing a hold or recall system assumes that everyone who needs a book will hold or recall it. My anecdotal experience is that casual patrons won’t bother. That is the whole argument for having books available on the shelf. Around here with renewals people can basically sit on a book for four months. If you haven’t gotten to a book in four months you aren’t getting to it. Good luck recalling a book someone has been sitting on for two years.

Also, as someone who has been on the business end of a few recalls all I can say is nuts to that. The first thing on my “When you run the library you can do it however you want” list is to stop recalls. Can’t renew? Fair enough. Have it back within a few days or else? I got it first. Why does johnny-come-lately take priority?

(Link via Library Stuff.)